Asian communities are used to being the battle ground for other people's wars. While terrorism looms as a political threat, if not a real threat, there are other struggles going on in Asia that are based on a transportation of foreign ideals to the region.

As 2006 unfolds, the issues of privatisation or divestment and civil sector mobilisation will become the major talking points in the region.

Privatisation, the massive sell-offs of public assets, often without the direct approval of the mass of the people, is an idea cooked up in western European think-tanks post-World War II and given legs by British prime minister Margaret Thatcher from the late 1970s.

It has come to stand for a selling out of the heart and soul of various local cultures in the name of big business and big profits for a handful of fortunates, the epitome of globalisation at its most damaging.

So, in Thailand, we see the 25 percent divestment of government interests in the electricity monopoly Egat being blocked twice by public outcry, which has been backed up by the courts. India is held back from selling off vital areas of its public infrastructure by virtue of deal with local leftist parties, at the behest of local power interests. Other proposals are forced to run through tortuous paths of myriad political and civil interests.

Pakistan, Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos and even China are also struggling to gain the full support of their constituents as they seek to auction off their nation's crown jewels.

In Japan, despite the Koizumi government winning a landslide victory last September on the back of a successful pitching of the privatisation of the massive postal service, there are many asking serious questions of the outcomes of such offerings.
A growing scandal over shoddy building safety inspections, which many see as emerging from that industry's deregulation in 1999, appears to embittering even those who had supported Koizumi's aggressive push to sell out to private interests.

Malaysians of course have been forced to watch and suffer the consequences the privatisation of various assets, most initiated by the erstwhile former leader Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Mention Malaysia Airlines, Tenaga and, most recently, the case of Metramac, and most Malaysians squirm. The rift created by "Daim's boys" through the heart of Malaysia's civil and economic culture is significant and underlines the problems inherent in ill-conceived privatisation schemes.

The sale of Russia's energy assets looms as a salutary lesson to all countries. At a time when the Russian economy should be benefiting from the windfall high oil prices, much of the money is actually going to shady business leaders, who bought the former state behemoths at fire sale prices and who now squirrel their vast sums away in Swiss bank accounts, offshore tax havens or into high profile European football teams.

Gaps in policy

With most Asian governments falling in on the side of privatisation and deregulation, often as part of their WTO of bilateral free trade commitments, gaps have appeared in public policy maintenance.

Governments appear to have assumed the people would not threaten to derail their plans, and many have failed to engage in the public debate many consider vital to ensuring private foreign interests don't end up owning their country's most important channels of commerce, trade, jobs and lifestyle.

Non-government organisations (NGOs) have taken the opportunity and rushed into this gap.

In Indonesia, local environment groups have almost brought the world's largest gold mining company, Newmont, to its knees, as they have pursued a human rights and environmental damages claim through the country's courts. The company's local boss may yet land in jail as a result.

Unions in India, Thailand, Hong Kong, Cambodia, South Korea and Pakistan have been at the forefront of the war against their governments' liberalisation agendas, with some considerable success.

China has experienced a boom in the growth of NGOs in the last two years, with now some many thousands of environmental NGOs all clamoring for support and profile on the mainland.

Recently, the Chinese central government announced it would openly work with NGOs on issues surrounding poverty reduction. It was a highly significant admission as to both the government's inability to properly govern, and to the manifest influence of the civil sector even in that country, where independent civil activism has hardly been encouraged.

And so, the most significant and influential battles in Asia in this and coming years will be between corporations and the civil sector. Governments will be, and to some extent are already, consigned to supporting roles, forced to make policy calls and political judgments, backing those forces which seem most likely to win or be well-supported by the voters.

Opportunities ahead

The upshot of all this is manifold.

First, there is an extraordinary opportunity for civil groups to construct coalitions region-wide. While government leaders have donned the funny shirts and played the multilateral game in Asia, civil groups have not tended to do so. The scourge of rash privatisation presents a unique chance to enact regional resource-sharing and strategy-oriented initiatives among NGOs.

Second, the debate over privatisation has highlighted the role of state companies. Rather than being sold, many believe they should lead the way in developing more socially responsible, accountable and transparent business practices.

In Malaysia, a company such as national oil corporation Petronas, for instance, is in a real position to engender greater standards among all businesses, big and small. It is a role the company has only acknowledged half-heartedly so far.

The third point is that the current situation requires all sectors to re-evaluate their role and adapt to a new era in Asia. Businesses need to be less, well business-like, without losing their ability to generate wealth and jobs.

Civil groups and NGOs need to wake up to the wider implications of their power. They too need to be transparent and accountable to the same degree as they are asking businesses to be. Governments will have to find ways to serve both these increasingly influential forces.

It looks like being an interesting year in Asia.

JAMES ROSE is editor (Asia-Pacific) of the magazine Ethical Corporation.